From the Philippine Daily Inquirer (Dec 24): Lacson surprised by names in ‘Order of Battle’ now
banned by new law
Not just the usual suspects.
Sometimes an “order of battle” would include the name of a government
official that intelligence reports would link to crimes like drugs and
kidnapping. Sen. Panfilo Lacson recalled being surprised upon reading the name of one
such individual when he still had access to the so-called hit list of enemies of
the state that the military has been prohibited from issuing following the
enactment of the Anti-Enforced Disappearance Act last week. “You would be surprised and wonder why the names of some personalities are
there,” he said in Filipino in a radio interview Sunday.
Pressed to explain, Lacson said he volunteered the observation “as a general
description. Sometimes, I would read an OB and tell myself, ‘why, I had no clue
this guy would be doing this or that’!’ Because there are instances no one would
have an inkling (hindi mo akalain) that a government official listed there would
be involved in drugs and kidnapping.” Lacson said that after recovering from his initial shock, he would go through
the “accompanying summaries and information” and realize that the person’s
inclusion in the OB “made sense” because the reports justifying so were
convincing. The senator refused to reveal the names he read in previous OBs.
Lacson said an OB’s contents were not supposed to be released to media
“because it is like telegraphing the punches of the military and the PNP
(Philippine National Police).” Lacson told the Philippine Daily Inquirer later in a series of text messages
that he had encountered such names when he was still director general of the
Philippine National Police (PNP) and while still involved in other law
enforcement agencies.
In the interview, the senator added that the crafting of an OB was not a
whimsical matter and involved the intelligence networks of the military, the PNP
and the National Bureau of Investigation. “It is a product of an intelligence workshop of the military, NBI, PNP…based
on the summary of information (SI) about a group of persons or a specific
individual,” Lacson said. An SI could be based on intelligence reports gathered by the government’s
intelligence community or from information that had already been “confirmed by
other sources.” These sources bring in reports that have been “compiled, accumulated and
become basis for who would be included” in the OB. While some names belonged to those who had existing warrants and were known
to have criminal records or are charged with criminal offenses, Lacson said
there were also cases when a name was unfortunately included due to
“intelligence reports that are not always true. The intelligence community can
commit mistakes.”
Lacson said the main purpose of an OB was to “guide” the military and the
police in identifying the personalities who deserved to be “covered by more
intelligence efforts.” “The OB gives a focus since there would be dossiers that provide material
pertaining to the activities and venues of the modus operandi of certain
people,” he noted. Trouble started when the OB was abused or when protocol was not followed,
Lacson said. Asked whether he has encountered stories of enforced disappearances (or
state-sponsored abductions and murders), Lacson did not give a categorical
answer but noted that in some cases, “there would be overeager law enforcement
units or personalities that could not build a case or cannot gather enough
evidence to stand in court even if they are certain that a person is deeply
involved in (an illegal activity). Lacson said frustration would force these individuals to resort to “such
things (sa gan’ung mga bagay).”
Lacson stressed that during his stint in the military and PNP, enforced
disappearances were not tolerated but added that the practice existed (“hindi
mawawala ‘yan”) and that such was also done in other countries (“maski sa ibang
bansa practice din yan”). “It’s a risk we take as law enforcement agents…to get more information or to
validate the pursued target, maraming dahilan (there were many reasons). Yung
iba naman out of frustration, yung iba overeager sila, nagmamadali
yung…trabahong tamad yun, eh (In other cases, they did it out of frustration,
the others were overeager, they were in a rush … but that’s the work of the
lazy),” he pointed out.
“One is supposed to develop intelligence out of sheer intelligence efforts.
Talagang babantayan mo, naka-stake out ka. Bantayan mo ang quarry mo. ‘Yung iba,
dahil siguro may pressure, may deadline. Nagre resort na lang. ‘Eto ang ating
target siguro kunin na lang natin ‘yon tapos bahala na sa bandang huli. Parang
ganun ang nangyari (You really have to guard your target, you go on stake-out.
You have to watch your quarry. But some were under pressure, were facing
deadlines. So, they just resorted to shortcuts. ‘This is our target. Let’s
just grab him and let’s see what turns out in the end, come what may.’ That’s
probably what happened),” the senator explained. However, he said he knew of instances when a “leak” would be made “to put a
target on spot.” “For example, maybe a person gained an enemy who has access to the OB and
would leak that page containing his name in OB,” the senator recalled. “Merong ibang information na suntok sa buwan. Alam mong nambobola ang gumawa
ng OB or may galit or for political reasons nilagay yung pangalan (ng kagalit).
Pilit na pilit, ika nga (There were information that were simply a shot at the
moon. You knew that the writer of the OB was making things up or he had an axe
to grind for political reasons, that’s why he put the name there. It was really
forced),” he added.
Lacson put his awareness of this practice to good use when he warned
detractors in the Arroyo administration against including his name in the OB in
2002. At that time, Lacson was in the early years of his first term as senator when
the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (ISAFP) produced
a witness known then as “Ador Mawanay” who alleged that Lacson had ties to
illegal drug activities. “When I got hold of a copy of that list (2002 OB) from my PNP contacts at
that time, I warned the PNP leadership and the intelligence community during a
committee hearing on illegal drugs presided by the late Sen. Robert Barbers
against an afterthought of including my name since I already had a hard copy
(where my name was not listed),” Lacson said in a text message. Apparently, those concerned listened to the senator’s warning and did not
include his name despite Mawanay’s insistence.
Also in the interview, Lacson confirmed previous reports that the practice of
enforced disappearances was most rampant (“pinakatalamak”) during the martial
law years when the military was emboldened by the perception that it was
“impregnable” and lost its “sense of vulnerability.” However, he noted that members of the leftist movement who were quick to make
noise about human rights violations suffered by their colleagues should also
check their own backyard for possible offenders. “Marami rin silang dinudukot na ‘di na nakikita. Minsan sa hanay nila mismo.
May mga nawawala tapos sina-summary execute nila (They also snatched many
people from their own ranks and these people were never seen again. These
people disappeared and were summarily executed by them),” the senator said over
radio.
“It’s a pity that we view the issue of human rights in a one-sided manner…We
tend to focus only on (violations committed by) law enforcement (agents), but
there are also numerous human rights victims among the ranks of the police and
military but these are hardly documented by the Commission on Human Rights,” he
added. Lacson added he was certain (“sigurado”) that leftist groups committed more
cases of enforced disappearances. “Kung titimbangin mo mas marami pa. Hindi na nga baka, sigurado mas maraming
committed by so-called enemies of the state. Not only against the military and
the police but also against civilians they terrorized (When you weighed facts,
they (rebels) have committed more cases of enforced disappearances. Surely, the
so-called enemies of the state committed more cases. Not only against the
military and the police but also against civilians they terrorized,” he noted.
Lacson said there were numerous cases when civilians living in far-flung
areas were visited at home and forced to support the movement.
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/328935/lacson-surprised-by-names-in-order-of-battle-now-banned-by-new-law
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.